Just A Friendly Reminder- No On Prop 8!
The Mormon Church has spent $20 mil trying to impose their beliefs on the citizens of California over Prop 8. I also can only assume that it is their dollars that are paying for the ads that you are seeing on this blog right now.
So in the interest of equal time, here is an ad produced by netroots activists and brothers Dante Atkins and David Atkins.
On a related note- I also recommend reading the fascinating book "Under The Banner of Heaven" by John Krakauer. Amazon. Mormon history, beliefs, and practices will just blow your mind!
So in the interest of equal time, here is an ad produced by netroots activists and brothers Dante Atkins and David Atkins.
On a related note- I also recommend reading the fascinating book "Under The Banner of Heaven" by John Krakauer. Amazon. Mormon history, beliefs, and practices will just blow your mind!
Labels: Mormons, No On Prop 8
Posted by Unknown @ 11/03/2008 06:18:00 PM
17 Comments:
all due respect, you are also trying to impose YOUR beliefs, are you not?
there are mormons in california, too.
No, the right for gays to marry exists. Prop 8 eliminates that right,
and would create discrimination against one group of people. THAT is imposing backward beliefs.
I've already voted twice - the first time was before the State Supreme Court overturned the affirmative vote stating marriage should be between male and female. The second time I voted was this election.
My vote remains unchanged. YES on marriage between a man and a woman. I reference this as follows:
All legal tender of the United States of America states, "In God We Trust." My next piece of evidence is the Pentateuch, "Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord."
Since when are we to legislate immorality under disguised "moral justice of non-discrimination?"
All legal tender said "In God We Trust" when we were under Jim Crow laws as well. So, I have no idea what you mean there.
And what's a Pentateuch?
the rights for gays to marry was the ruling of four judges over existing law.
using your logic, those judges should be set aside, since there was a prohibition prior to their ruling.
whatever the case, you are laying the blame for something on mormon influence, when they are doing something no different than what you are trying to do.
if it is okay for you to share your opinion and influence, it should be okay for them.
and if you want the presiding law to prevail, the law that existed prior to the four judges making their ruling should stand.
look, i agree with everyone to express their views, including you and the mormons. but it is patently wrong to try and blame it on them.
it's spelled Pentatuch
I don't see anyone trying to make a law to keep Mormons from knocking on your door.
And how can one not question the Mormons, when they have over $20 mil in the kitty
trying to impose their beliefs? I personally don't have a dime in this fight, so I don't know how you can make that comparison?
And what's a Pentatuch ?
"Alex, What are the first five books of the Bible?"
Prop 8 r-e-s-t-o-r-e-s traditional marriage to what the law was before the activist judges took it upon themselves.
Activist judges played a big part in the civil rights movement of the 60's.
Should we r-e-s-t-o-r-e the discrimination against blacks because
of their actions?
Joe, with all due respect, the resulting decision of Brown vs. Board of Education was not the result of activist judges, but rather the United States Supreme Court of 1954 during the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower. That decision was the second link in the 20th Century Civil Rights Movement for Black Americans.
Anti-Proposition 8 proponents attempt to justify aberrant behavior by stating they are being discriminated against just like Black Americans were during the Jim Crow era. The fallacy is that discrimination against sexual behavior does not equal ethnic discrimination based upon skin color. Discrimination based upon one's ethnicity is wrong. Discrimination based upon behavior is needed, even required, if the choice is to survive or die.
Further, if proponents of homosexual "rights" are successful, then what's to stop child predators from organizing a political movement and claiming their rights are being violated? And what about serial killers? Are their "rights" being violated because they enjoy killing other humans, and are now being prevented from killing others by being incarcerated? What about arsonists? If arsonists are sentenced to prison, are the arsonists being discriminated against?
I could go on ad nauseum, but what's the point? I'm sure you catch my drift.
Justsayamy @ 7:35 - I took the precaution of using Spellcheck. Pentateuch is the correct spelling. I copy/pasted your spelling, and Spellcheck corrected it to "Pentateuch."
"The fallacy is that discrimination against sexual behavior does not equal ethnic discrimination based upon skin color. Discrimination based upon one's ethnicity is wrong. Discrimination based upon behavior is needed, even required, if the choice is to survive or die."
Does one choose their skin color?
No.
Does one choose their sexual orientation? No.
And really Stephan, arsonists, pedophiles, and serial killers are to be equated? I will just let you
live in that world of thought.It is
it's own deviant and immoral ghetto.
BTW, Brown Vs Board of Education was a culmination not a starting point. I wasn't even referring to that ruling.
"It is it's own deviant and immoral ghetto." My point exactly about homosexuality. Homosexuality is a choice. If it were not a choice, then why would the homosexual movement be required teaching in certain other States in the U.S. under the guise of "alternative lifestyles?"
And Joe, you do need to become more familiar with history. Brown vs. Board of Education was a second link in the Civil Rights Movement of the 20th Century, not a culmination. However, you failed to ask what the first link was. It can be reference by the name of President Eisenhower's immediate predecessor.
I've a long day ahead tomorrow. I'm turning in.
Good night, Joe.
Good night, Chet.
Good night, David.
Yes. You go to bed now.
Oh yeah...this ad is really going to convince people to vote No on Prop 8.
I'm surprised they didn't have these guys decked out with swastika armbands and goose-stepping across the carpet.
With tactics this pale, you No on Prop 8 people deserve to lose.
VOTE YES ON 8
VOTE YES ON 8
VOTE YES ON 8
VOTE YES ON 8
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home